Accelerated Education Frequently Asked Questions

A flexible, age-appropriate program, run in an accelerated time frame, which aims to provide access to education for disadvantaged, over-age, out-of-school children and youth. This may include those who missed out on or had their education interrupted by poverty, marginalization, conflict, and crisis. The goal of an AEP is to provide learners with equivalent, certified competencies for basic education using effective teaching and learning approaches that match their level of cognitive maturity. Please see the Program definitions for definitions of AE and other programs. 

AEPs are for older learners (usually over the age of 10 years); this is because younger children do not yet have the cognitive maturity to be able to successfully cope with an accelerated curriculum that condenses the whole primary cycle into 2-3 AEP levels, with each level usually being delivered over one year. Additionally, those learners who are 18 or over should generally be encouraged to go into adult education classes rather than AE, noting this is dependent on context. Age levels at the upper end can be increased, especially in contexts where a primary school leaving certificate is important.

The INEE Accelerated Education Working Group (AEWG) is an inter-agency working group comprised of education partners supporting, implementing, and/or funding AE and other flexible education programs. The overarching aim of the AEWG is to support Ministries of Education, implementing partners, and donors in designing, implementing, monitoring, and funding AE and other flexible education programs. The AEWG also supports Education Clusters and EiE Working Groups. For the types of support available to Clusters and Working Groups, see the offer of support. Any additional questions about the AEWG can be directed to [email protected].

The AEWG publishes a number of resources which are available on the INEE AEWG webpage. All AEWG tools and resources are available in five languages: English, French, Arabic, Spanish, and Portuguese.

There are many different models of AEPs. The level of education and the rate of acceleration varies. AEPs can be found at both the primary and secondary levels. Some of the most common models are:

• Acceleration of lower primary only with transition into upper primary
• Acceleration of the entire primary cycle with the transition into formal primary education when the learner is the right age/ right grade; secondary; vocational training or directly to livelihoods

Globally, while most AEPs cover the primary level, there are more and more AEPs offered at the secondary level.

• Acceleration of lower secondary, followed by a transition into upper secondary

In terms of the acceleration, there are examples of:

• two years of core subjects using priority learning outcomes from the formal education curriculum condensed into one year of accelerated education which may also include social emotional learning (SEL)
• three years of core subjects using priority learning outcomes from the formal education curriculum condensed into one year of accelerated education which may also include SEL

An AEP cycle is made up of a number of AEP levels (or cycles/ packages - the naming varies according to the context); usually 2-3 levels. Each level is equivalent to a number of grades at the primary or secondary level as described above.

In response to the high numbers of OOSCY, the Education 2030: Framework for Action, identifies the need for non-formal and informal education programming which affords flexible and alternative pathways and entry/re-entry points into the formal education system. Importantly, it is acknowledged that the knowledge, skills, and competencies acquired in these programs should be recognized, validated, and accredited. AE programming serves both mandates. AEPs are used to promote access to certified education for children and youth who have missed out on substantial amounts of schooling. To read more about how AEPs contribute to solutions for OOSCY read The Case for AE.

Because AEP learners are older, they tend to have more life experience and greater cognitive maturity compared to their peers in regular education programs. This life experience is important as it influences both the pace of learning and the teaching methods, which should be adapted to suit older learners. Additionally, many AEP learners take on important roles in their communities, such as caregivers or parents, which should be acknowledged and reflected in the pedagogy. AEPs can leverage these roles and life experiences to make learning more relevant and engaging.

It is also important to recognize that AEP learners come from diverse backgrounds and may include learners with disabilities. Inclusive and flexible pedagogical approaches are critical to ensure that all learners, regardless of their background or individual needs, can fully participate and benefit from AE.

AE curricula do more than simply condense the formal curriculum into a shorter time frame. Ideally, Ministry of Education specialists identify critical learning outcomes from key subjects, focusing on the essential knowledge and skills that AE learners need to succeed.  Where this is not possible, cluster members can identify relevant curriculum experts to support the process.

An AE curriculum goes beyond literacy and numeracy, incorporating foundational skills that support learning across all subject areas. This includes social-emotional learning (SEL) and life skills either integrated into all AEP subjects or as standalone subjects, which are crucial for helping learners build resilience, manage emotions, and navigate the challenges they face in their daily lives.

As many AE classes operate in emergency and crisis contexts, it is also relevant to incorporate mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS) elements into both the curriculum and co-curricular programs for learners (and facilitators).  Peace-building, conflict resolution, and other such topics may also be valuable.

See Condensing a Curriculum for Accelerated Education: An A to Z Guide for more information.

AE classes encompass pedagogy that is appropriate for over-age learners and includes linking teaching and learning to learners' own lived experiences. Older learners can also use peer-to-peer teaching and learning and self-assessment. Pedagogy is learner-centered and flexible according to the needs of the learners.

As with learners in the formal system, AE learners should have regular formative and summative assessments in line with the national curriculum or other curriculum that is approved for use in the response. As AE learners are older, teachers can also draw on their strengths and maturity and use self-assessment. 

The times of AE classes should ideally be agreed upon in consultation with the learners and the community and take into consideration the needs, demands, and logistics specific to that context. AE learners, because they are older, often have additional responsibilities such as child care, being a head of household, and having to work. Taking into consideration market days, food distribution days in EiE contexts, or childcare availability are all examples of considerations that might need to be considered in scheduling class time.

AE classrooms may use the formal school classrooms including Temporary Learning Spaces (TLS) after school has finished for the day; in some cases, if there are enough classrooms AE classes can operate at the same time as formal classes.  In these instances, existing school furniture may be used. Where this is not possible, the community and local leaders can be engaged to identify suitable alternative locations for an AEP center. Furniture may need to be provided.  Adequate funding should be allocated to provide AEP teachers and learners with the necessary materials. Ultimately the space must be safe for all learners to use and access.

AEPs often integrate pedagogical approaches tailored to older learners, including the incorporation of SEL into daily instructional practice (either integrated throughout all AE subjects or as a stand-alone subject). This helps AE learners manage their emotions, develop critical communication skills, and build resilience. These skills are vital, as they not only enhance the learning process but also support learners in navigating their everyday challenges and responsibilities, which in turn empowers learners to become partners in creating a safe, inclusive, and supportive learning environment.

Teachers of AEPs may also be called facilitators or community facilitators depending on the context. 

AEPs may recruit many different types of teachers including members of the community, retired formal school teachers, employed formal school teachers with sufficient time to take on a second shift, teachers from host communities, and those certified nationally or in their home country.

Where possible, there should be a good balance of male/female teachers and ideally, they should speak the learners’ first language. AEP teachers should ideally be recruited from the local community.  

Criteria used for the selection of AEP teachers should be discussed and agreed upon with partners and community members.

Ideally, AEP teachers should be remunerated through the Ministry of Education, in line with national policy within the country of implementation. If this is not immediately possible, stakeholders and implementing partners should coordinate the salary of AEP teachers with the Education Cluster or EiE Working Group in the country which should consider the civil service and Ministry of Education salary scale for teachers. 

Ideally, MoE supervisors should provide regular supportive supervision to AEP teachers; where this is not possible, implementing partners may put in place their own regular supportive supervision, sometimes with the support of the Education Cluster/ EiE Working Group as needed. In addition, senior teachers and/or headteachers at the AEP center level (if using school classrooms and/or facilities) should also be providing regular, routine supervision to AEP teachers.  

Supervision should include regular lesson observations based on supporting AE teachers to improve their competencies, instruction, and student learning outcomes. The observation checklist should be developed based on the National teacher competencies (if available) and  AEP Teacher Professional Development Competencies (see Module 2 of the AE Introductory Teacher Training Pack). Supervision should also include monitoring teacher attendance, timekeeping, and general support. Teachers should also receive support where necessary in completing the relevant documentation; e.g., student attendance, report cards, etc. 

AEP teachers should be trained in accelerated learning pedagogy; this includes recognizing the needs of AEP learners compared to learners attending primary or secondary school and considering the differing pedagogical approaches used for AEP compared to non-accelerated learning. If teachers lack key skills or knowledge, a twin-track approach may be used that includes basic, universal teaching methods and boosts content knowledge. The AE Introductory Teacher Training Package provides detailed, scripted training for AEP teachers. Training, self-directed learning, coaching, and teacher learning circles should be part of a regular comprehensive teacher continuing professional development package for AEP teachers. 

Where possible, work alongside teacher training institutions and national teacher professional development bodies to support the institutionalization of the training approach as well as provide AEP teachers with nationally recognized knowledge and skills aligned to national teacher competencies. In an emergency context where this is not possible, the Education Cluster/ EiE Working Group can consider setting standards for TPD for AE teachers/ facilitators as part of the Education Cluster Strategy.

AEPs should be monitored and evaluated and have clear goals, objectives, and milestones. The AE Programme Monitoring & Evaluation Toolkit provides tools and guidance to support the development of a robust MEAL framework.

The monitoring of AEP programs should ideally be led by the relevant Ministry of Education body or where this is not possible by the implementing partner. In emergency contexts, the Education Cluster/ EiE Working Group can support the monitoring of AEP as part of the overall monitoring of the EiE response. Leaders of the AEP centers and community members should be involved in the monitoring and also be included in any dissemination of monitoring results.

Additionally, the monitoring and evaluation of AEPs should align with the formal education system indicators or Education Cluster monitoring indicators in terms of looking at attendance, retention, completion, transition, and learning equity. 

Ideally, AEPs should be funded by national education budgets with Education Sector Plans having specific budget lines for AEPs. Where this is not possible, and, particularly in emergency contexts, AEPs can be funded by humanitarian/ development partners.  Funding for the whole Primary or Secondary level AEP cycle (2-3 levels/ years) is recommended to ensure that over-age learners who are too old to transition back into formal education (at the right age for a grade) can transition from one AEP level to the next AEP level and complete the entire AEP cycle, get a certificate, and transition to formal secondary education or other alternative learning pathways. If AEP is being newly introduced in a country or context, ensure adequate funding and time is allocated for the development and piloting of an AEP curriculum. A clear exit strategy should be developed before any funding ends. 

We acknowledge that in emergency contexts funding is often short term. If this is the case then we recommend that, in collaboration with education authorities where possible, Education Clusters should include complete cycles of AE in strategic plans and coordinate AEP implementation with partners to ensure continuity of funding and program delivery to the greatest extent possible. Where funding is short-term (less than 1 year) and timebound, and an AEP system (curriculum, trained teachers, etc.) is not already in place, AEP may not be the best choice for the context.

AEP learners may transition to formal primary or secondary school; for example; a learner who has completed Level 1 and has reached the appropriate age should transition back into primary school at the appropriate grade. AEP learners should transition from one AE level to another whilst they are still over age and those learners who complete all levels of the primary certified AEP can transition to secondary school or into vocational and/or livelihood opportunities that may be in or outside the formal sector.

For AEP success and sustainability, community engagement is critical which could include the establishment of community education committees (CECs) or community outreach workers that can provide the bridge between the AEP and communities. The CECs should be involved in community sensitization to support the enrolment of all eligible children including girls and children with disabilities into the AEP. Additionally, the CECs should be involved in the planning and management of the AEP as well as monitoring community perceptions and feedback challenges and opportunities to the AEP implementers.

Communities can also be involved in aspects such as school feeding, monitoring, and supporting attendance, maintaining learning spaces, and promoting the school success of their own children at home and in the classroom.

Certification at the end of an AEP cycle is critical as it allows AEP learners to register for and sit examinations that provide a nationally recognized certificate e.g., primary equivalency. This supports transition pathways and enables the AEP learner to enter into formal education, training, or employment.

Recognition by the relevant authorities including schools to enrol AEP learners at the appropriate grade based on the completion of specific AEP levels is critical. For example, a learner completing AEP level 1 who wishes to enroll in primary school, should be automatically placed in the appropriate Grade level according to their age and the AEP level equivalency.

Both AEPs and the formal system have distinct roles to play and should be seen as essential in certain contexts where there is a high number of over-age OOSCY who require a viable alternative to formal education. AE should not become an alternative to the formal system or in any way compete or become a parallel system – appropriate learning pathways based on the context and needs of groups of children should always be available.

Formal primary education (or similar, complementary EiE options) should be promoted for those younger out-of-school learners (usually under the age of 10 years) who are able to enroll at the appropriate grade level. AE has specific pedagogical approaches that cater to AE learners’ cognitive maturity allowing them to access and succeed with an accelerated education curriculum.